Baseball Musings: That's 4 for the V, 1 for the A, Double Letter Score on the Z

December 04, 2003

That's 4 for the V, 1 for the A, Double Letter Score on the Z

It appears the Yankees have made a trade with Montreal, acquiring Javier Vazquez for Nick Johnson, Juan Rivera and Randy Choate. (Javier Vazquez has the highest scoring Scrabble name in the history of MLB.) Vazquez has a career 3/1 strikeout to walk ratio, and has been a very good, dependable pitcher over the last three years. He's a good acquistion. One the flip side, I think this Buster Olney piece is ringing more true that it did two days ago.

It all seems familiar. From 1976-1981 -- a period of six years -- the Yankees had dominant pitching, with Sparky Lyle and Ron Guidry and Goose Gossage and Catfish Hunter, won two World Series and played in two others and made the playoffs every year but one. Steinbrenner asserted even greater control, lured free agents, stripped the farm system. By 1983 the Yankees had a lineup of Roy Smalleys and Steve Kemps, aging hitters who had seen their best years, and by 1986 the Yankees' leading starter was Dennis Rasmussen, an 18-game winner; no other pitcher won 10 games.

Steinbrenner was running the show, and the Yankees' victory total declined. Ninety wins in 1986, then 89 victories, 85, 74, and 67. That's when Steinbrenner was suspended, and Michael became general manager.

It should also be noted that George was suspended during the runnup to the 1976-81 era. When I read this story Tuesday, I thought the comparison wasn't quite that good, given that the Yankees had Nick Johnson. But now I'm not so sure. If and when the Yankees sign Sheffield, they'll still have a very good team, but it's starting to look like an old team. In the late 90's, the Yankees were a young team with veteran role players. Now, they are a veteran team with no youth on the horizon. This is what led to the demise of the Orioles in the late 90's, and the same thing may happen to the Yankees.

The Transaction Guy offers his take on how the deal went down.

Posted by David Pinto at 01:48 PM | Trades | TrackBack (0)

Comments

Nick Johnson will be the second coming of Todd Helton. Mark my obscenity free words.

Posted by: steve at December 4, 2003 02:59 PM

Ok, that post by The Transaction Guy was hilarious. Now, on to Vazquez. I'm a bit unsure of this simply for the fact that there is one thing The Transacction Guy mentions, the farm system. Without Rivera and Johnson, there really isn't much of anything left of developing youth. Fox has the Yankees rated 30th currently in their farm system. While Vazquez isn't old (27 I think), hopefully with the signing of Pettite (crosses fingers) they can have a solid starting rotation for a while at least.

But, now we get to the position players and things don't look all that well, especially Right Field. I'm not that big of a Sheffield fan at all, (assuming the tons of rumors flying about that the Yankees will sign him) and am worried about him producing numbers like last year or anything close. That's two aging outfielders. Plus, they got rid of Mondesi for being a malcontent, Gary has proven he has his moments in the past. Papa Joe may not be too happy if any snags are encountered.

Remember the 80's? Well, in a little while I think us Yankee fans will be suffering through again for a while. Just when I though Georgy was on the right track.

Posted by: Tom F. at December 4, 2003 03:10 PM

As if I wasn't long winded enough in the last post, after I submitted, I remembered two more important points about the Vazquez deal.

1. Win shares has Vazquez at 21. Johnson is 14, Rivera 4 and Choate 0. That's deceiving because all 3 of the Yankee players didn't play on a full time basis. Nick is probably a 16-18 WS type of guy minimally on a full time basis. You can probably bump Rivera up 1 or 2 as well.

2. Vazquez moves from NL to AL. While I'm one of those that believes a good pitcher should be able to overcome that, funny things happen occasionally when pitchers change leagues.

Posted by: Tom F. at December 4, 2003 03:30 PM

My main concern for the Yankee position players isn't their outfield (I'm a Gary Sheffield believer, and I think Matsui will be even better next year), it's their infield. Do you really think Giambi can give them 150 games at first base? He's looking more and more like Mark McGwire every year: top three first baseman when healthy, but missing a good 25 games a year due to a bum knee. Add in the defensive inadequacies of Jeter, the stagnant development of Soriano into a complete hitter, and the inconsistency of Aaron Boone, and that infield is looking a lot less productive than a year ago.

Posted by: Daniel at December 4, 2003 04:31 PM

But taking Giambi's injuries into account, you also have to take Nick's injuries into account. When was the last time he played a full season? 4-5 years ago? Who knows if he ever will. He might, but he might not. And I wonder who is going to fill in for Giambi when he needs a rest. The Yanks better pick up a backup 1B like JT Snow or Travis Lee or someone who can actually play the position well and come off the bench as a decent bat, and play the occasional DH.

Does anyone know if the Yanks signed Vazquez to an extension? If they only get the guy for one year, this trade really sucks. If not, then I think it's a decent trade - Vazquez can be as good as Schilling. Maybe not quite as many strikeouts, but his numbers can easily be as good.

Posted by: sabernar at December 4, 2003 04:49 PM

Agreed sabernar. But between Nick and Giambi, the Yankees had an all-star first baseman just about every game last year. Allowing Johnson to spell Giambi meant that he didn't get hurt as often, and while Johnson's wrist problems may never be solved, he's still young, cheap, and effective. If Johnson overcomes his injuries, and Giambi never repeats his 2002 performance, the Yankees will be kicking themselves over this trade for years.

Posted by: Daniel at December 4, 2003 04:55 PM

Sorry folks, but Javier is no Curt.

Yankees rotation:
1. Petitte (IF he signs back, 50/50 chance)
2. Mussina
3. Vazquez
4. Contreras
5. Wells (if signs)/Lieber/Weaver

Red Sox rotation:
1. Pedro
2. Schilling
3. Lowe
4. Wakefield
5. BK Kim/Arroyo

Which would you rather have? It's not even close IMO...the Sox have 2 HOFs, All-Star 20-game winner, playoff ace, and two improving and impressive prospects. I serouisly think, if Foulke and a few other solid releivers are signed (Timlin, Embree, Williamson still sound good to me), that this is one of the best pitching staffs the Sox have EVER had.

Posted by: Ryan at December 4, 2003 06:34 PM

The question in my mind: does getting Vasquez's contract out of the way and cheap Johnson in return allow the Expos to re-sign Vlad?

Posted by: Troy at December 4, 2003 08:02 PM

I think Vlad's going to Baltimore. Vlad and Javier were removed from the Expos website a while back.

Posted by: Aaron at December 4, 2003 09:21 PM

I'll ask again, does anyone know if Vazquez was given a contract extension, or do the Yanks only get him for a year?

Posted by: sabernar at December 4, 2003 09:58 PM

It looks like they have him for one year. Apparently The Expos didn't allow the Yanks the usual 72 hours to get a contract extension signed, but the Yanks think they can sign him.

Posted by: sabernar at December 4, 2003 10:24 PM

The Expos didn't allow the Yanks the usual 72 hours???? Who owns the Expos?????????????? Selig is in bed with the Red Sox.

Posted by: steve at December 8, 2003 12:45 PM

Nice way out ... but if i do the ame thing in my car .. the pathetic driver i ma ... i will surely bang it against some other vehicle .

Posted by: Google at November 10, 2004 05:51 PM

"I??m not fiercely proud to be an American because of my upbringing, or an accident of birth. I read. I think. I make my own judgments. I feel that way based on the evidence." - {Yourself)
Search Google http://www.google.com/

Posted by: Google at November 14, 2004 04:45 PM

No nececito que alg?n extranjero me venga a decir ese tipo de cosas. Me gusta compartir ideas y las digo sin el ?nimo de ofender.
Search Google http://www.google.com/

Posted by: Google at November 16, 2004 10:51 PM